Allowed

Jitendra Yadav S/O Deshraj Yadav v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC26 Jul 2021CRLMB/10727/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to a 15-year-old juvenile petitioner accused of offences under Sections 143, 341, and 323 IPC. The court ordered the petitioner's release upon surrendering a personal bond executed by his guardian along with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted pending release on personal bond by guardian and two sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- each.

Jitendra Yadav S/O Deshraj Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10727/2021

¶3

Jitendra Yadav S/o Deshraj Yadav, R/o Gram Mundiya Kheda Tehsil Mundawar Dist. Alwar Raj. through His Guardian Father Deshraj Yadav

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Kumar Yadav, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Agarwal, Public Prosecutor

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA

¶10

Order

¶11

26/07/2021 :

¶12

Instant application has been preferred under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner-juvenile in a case arising out of impugned First Information Report No.219/2021 registered at Police Station Mundawar Police District Bhiwadi District Alwar for offences punishable under Sections 143, 341 and 323 of Indian Penal Code.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-juvenile submits that the petitioner is a juvenile aged about fifteen-years and is school going student. Counsel further submits that the bail application of co-accused, namely Rajpal @ Raju under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has also been granted by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mundawar Alwar vide its order dated 17.06.2021. Counsel also submits that there is no specific allegation of inflicting injury on the person of injured against the petitioner-juvenile. Counsel contends that there are cross-cases between the complainant party and accused-party and from

¶14

(2 of 3)

¶15

[CRLMB-10727/2021]

¶16

the side of accused-party, one F.I.R. bearing No.226/2021 has also been registered in the same Police Station. Hence, the petitioner-juvenile may be enlarged on bail.

¶17

On the other-hand, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, has opposed the bail application.

¶18

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-juvenile through his natural guardian father Deshraj Yadav as well learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, and perused the material made available on record.

¶19

As per Injury Report of injured/complainant Leelaram, he sustained three injuries. Injury No.1 was caused by sharp-edged weapon on his nose, which is grievous in nature. As per Police statement of Leelaram, the said injury was attributed to co-accused, namely Rajpal @ Raju.

¶20

Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-juvenile and looking to the facts and circumstances of the present case but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner-juvenile on anticipatory bail.

¶21

Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is, hereby, ordered that in case of arrest of the petitioner-juvenile, namely Jitendra Yadav son of Deshraj Yadav in F.I.R. No.219/2021 registered at Police Station Mundawar Police District Bhiwadi, District Alwar, by the Investigating Officer, he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond by his natural guardian (father Shri Deshraj Yadav) in the sum of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of concerned S.H.O./I.O. on the following conditions :-

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

[CRLMB-10727/2021]

¶24

(i) That the petitioner-juvenile will make himself available for the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer;

¶25

(ii) That the petitioner-juvenile will not leave India without permission of the Court;

¶26

(iii) That the petitioner-juvenile will not temper with the evidence or threaten or pressurize the witnesses in the case;

¶27

(iv) That during pendency of the investigation/trial of the case, his guardian shall keep proper look-after of the delinquent child and secure him away from the company of the known criminals.”

¶28

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J

¶29

ASHOK/12

Jitendra Yadav S/O Deshraj Yadav v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Yadav S/O Deshraj Yadav v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahendra S/O Amba Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt Anita and Ors. Vs Kanaram and Ors.

New India Assurance Insuranceco Ltd. Vs Smt Anita and Ors.

Ashu Son of Shri Devkinadan Vs State of Rajasthan

Mubin S/O Shri Moliya Vs State of Rajasthan

Nihala Ram S/O Late Sh. Mukandaram Vs State of Rajasthan